State College Community Speaks Out in Opposition of Bally’s Casino Near Penn State
Posted on: January 23, 2023, 02:07h.
Last updated on: January 23, 2023, 04:15h.
If there are State College residents who support allowing Rhode Island-based Bally’s Corporation to redevelop the former Macy’s department store at the Nittany Mall into a casino, Casino.org hasn’t heard from them.
We have, however, fielded hundreds of comments from concerned Centre County citizens who think gambling should stay far away from Penn State University Park.
Bally’s partnered with Penn State alumnus and former university trustee Ira Lubert. The alliance was made soon after he won the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board’s (PGCB) September 2020 auction for a Category 4 satellite casino. Lubert outbid Baltimore-based Cordish Companies, which operates two casinos in Pennsylvania — Live! Casino Hotel Philadelphia and Live! Casino Pittsburgh, the latter being a Category 4 property.
Lubert and Cordish qualified to participate in the September 2020 auction because they held ownership stakes in a slot machine license in the Commonwealth. Lubert owns a 3% stake in Rivers Casino Pittsburgh.
Bally’s didn’t qualify, as the company doesn’t have any vested interest in a Pennsylvania slot license. Cordish contends that Lubert orchestrated a scheme with Bally’s before the auction that ran afoul of the state’s bidding rules. As such, Cordish believes the state should dismiss Lubert and Bally’s Category 4 license application.
The PGCB will hear from Cordish during its meeting scheduled for this Wednesday, January 25. The hearing will also include comments from Bally’s reps and the PGCB’s Office of Enforcement Counsel.
State College Opposition
Pennsylvania greatly expanded gaming in 2017. The law authorized iGaming, retail and online sports betting, video gaming terminals at truck stops, fantasy sports, and Category 4 casinos.
The law provided townships and municipalities with the right to opt out of being considered for a Category 4 development — commonly referred to as “mini-casinos” and “satellite casinos.” More than 1,000 local governments did just that. But somewhat surprisingly, because of its close proximity to Penn State, where more than 46K undergrads live and study, College Township remained in the bidding pool.
It’s a decision the College Township council has since expressed regret about. That’s after the local community spoke out in considerable opposition to allowing a casino to come to Centre County.
During PGCB’s public input period, the state received more than 5,000 letters expressing disagreement with Bally’s plan based on a multitude of concerns. Since the public input period closed, the Penn State community has turned to media outlets covering the controversial matter, with Casino.org being one such source, to keep their voices being heard.
Casino.org has received hundreds of emails and comments expressing antagonism to the Bally’s State College project. Our January 14 coverage garnered 151 comments in opposition alone. The news story collected just one comment in support. To read the comments, click here.
Public Opinion Considered
The PGCB has promised the local opposition that the state will weigh the community feedback in making its final decision as to whether to grant Bally’s an operating license for College Township.
But since College Township didn’t opt out of the Category 4 bidding before the state’s August 2019 deadline, it’s unclear whether the PGCB would be willing to deny Bally’s a gaming license simply on the grounds of public opposition.
A likelier path to halting Bally’s project comes from Cordish. Regardless of which direction the gaming board takes, a legal appeal is likely. Title 4, which consists of the state’s gaming laws, directs the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to handle PGCB licensing appeals.
If the PGCB signs off on the Bally’s State College casino, Cordish is likely to appeal. But if the PGCB decides to terminate Bally’s plan because of the Cordish allegation or simply because the public seemingly opposes the development, Bally’s would be expected to appeal that decision.
Related News Articles
Most Popular
Most Commented
Most Read
Last Comments ( 49 )
Dottie S. There's no reason we can't have them at the mall. There's nothing else at the mall.. But Thank God Jerry S. Can't play since they won't have the machines in Prison. He isn't part of Penn State anymore but he is 100% part of the STATE PENN..
Please don't open a casino here. We strongly oppose corruption of our college students who are vulnerable. Parents won't send their kids here!
Thank you for shining a light on this critically important issue. The local opposition for a casino has been overwhelming!! Residents of Happy Valley have been shocked and disappointed that things have gone as far as they have. This community does not want a casino here!! Our local representatives dropped the ball by not opting out when they had the chance. We now need the PA Gaming Control Board to save our way of life and vote not to approve this casino at the Nittany Mall. Please do the right thing and save us from this travesty. It would be a blight on this beautiful, family friendly area.
What is the point of having a PGCB if they won't represent the public's interests? In this case, the public has made it overwhelmingly clear that no one wants a casino anywhere near Penn State. The PGCB should deny this application. The real shame is that the leadership at Penn State will not make any statement against the casino when all the evidence is clear that the Penn State students will likely be the most in danger if a casino is built nearby. The Penn State leadership should be embarrassed that they will not take a public stance on this issue. Why won't they use the full force of their ability to lobby the commonwealth to stop this casino? Instead, they decided not to upset donors and trustees while letting future students suffer the consequences of gambling addiction.